For Security's Sake,
D.C. Government Should Ignore Greenpeace on Homeland Security

by Bonner Cohen

The Department of Homeland Security's
recent "Code-Orange" alert was a grim reminder of the
ever-present threat posed by terrorism. Fortunately, the alert
passed with no harm done.

Indeed, the heightened awareness shown
by security officials, law-enforcement personnel, and the private
sector is a clear and welcome indication that post 9/11 America
is taking terrorism seriously. And as the attack on the Pentagon
shows, Washington, D.C. is a prime target for terrorist deeds.
To ensure that the nation's capital is spared another chapter
of carnage, it is imperative vigilance be maintained, and that
efforts to safeguard Washington don't inadvertently play into
the hands of terrorists.

Currently, the D.C. Council is considering
a bill that would, with few exceptions, prohibit the shipment
of hazardous materials by truck or rail through the District
of Columbia. The ban would force freight trains carrying hazardous
materials to be rerouted to the Norfolk Southern rail line about
50 miles west of the District. Trucks transporting such chemicals
would have to use the Beltway.

The bill's intent is a noble one: to help safeguard the U.S.
Capitol, the White House, the monuments on the Mall, and the
thousands of people who congregate there from a chemical attack
on the area's transportation system. However, the "Terrorism
Prevention and Safety in Hazardous Materials Act of 2004"
will actually make more difficult the already arduous task of
protecting Washington from the depredations of terrorists.

For one thing, the bill runs counter
to the federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, which
was created to prevent state and local governments from interfering
with the legal transport of hazardous materials through their
jurisdictions. In enacting the federal statute, Congress recognized
the vital role hazardous materials and the products and technologies
developed there from play in commerce, public health, and national
security.

Moreover, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks,
a massive effort is already underway to secure the District of
Columbia against the threat of terrorism. The Department of Homeland
Security, FBI, Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad
Administration, capitol police, park police, local fire and rescue
personnel, and the private sector have developed vulnerability
assessments and security plans that apply to fixed installations
and all means of transportation. Some of these measures are obvious
such as restricted access to certain areas; others are invisible
to the naked eye. Together, they have to date kept the District
safe from terrorist attacks.

The purpose of transporting hazardous
materials is to get them into the hands of end-users who transform
them into useful products that do such things as purify drinking
water, treat diseases, protect crops, and provide critical assets
in the war on terrorism.

Cipro ®, for example, is a chlorine-based
antibiotic used to treat people exposed to anthrax. No one knows
when or if there will be another anthrax incident in Washington
or elsewhere. What we do know, however, is that adequate supplies
of Cipro ® need to be on hand just in case. And you can't
send Cipro ® over the Internet.

This is why rerouting freight trains
with tank cars away from Washington is a bad idea. It would force
them to travel a greater distance and actually increase the statistical
possibility of an accidental chemical release. The risk of a
chemical release, whether by accident or as a result of a terrorist
attack, would simply shift from one community to another. Furthermore,
the circuitous route will only delay the arrival of the materials
to their final destination. These are just the kind of self-defeating
disruptions of our daily lives that terrorist organizations want
us to carry out.
What's more, the ban would set a dangerous precedent that other
jurisdictions throughout the United States might be tempted to
follow. The resulting rerouting of freight trains across America's
30,000-mile network of railroad track would lead to widespread
economic dislocations and increased security problems, both of
which would only further the interests of terrorists.

It is revealing that the bill pending
before the D.C. Council is supported by -- of all organizations
-- Greenpeace. This is the same Greenpeace that, in the aftermath
of the 9/11 attacks, launched a campaign providing detailed maps
and information about the storage of chemicals at specific facilities
around the country. Greenpeace and other irresponsible environmental
groups went so far as to post this information on the Internet
despite concerns from law-enforcement officials and emergency-response
personnel that they were, in effect, providing a "road map"
for terrorists in selecting targets.

Homeland security is a deadly serious business. While careful
attention should be paid to unique situations prevailing at different
locations around the nation, we should avoid initiatives that
are hatched independent of cooperative plans already in place
and that ultimately undermine our ability to protect Americans
from terrorists.

# # #

Bonner R. Cohen is a senior
fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research. He
can be reached at [email protected].